Got reported and a call from the FAA

[Don Testme]

Take a look at the following link. All night operations require lights.

Can I Fly My Drone At Night: Pilotinstitute.com

Both Part 107-licensed and recreational drone pilots can now fly their drones at night without having to apply for a waiver.

pilotinstitute.com

Ok. Light at night are what is needed. Am I gonna do it? LOL. I'm not getting attacked. But, when RID starts, I'll start using lights.. Maybe.

 

[karlblessing]

Take a look at the following link. All night operations require lights.

Can I Fly My Drone At Night: Pilotinstitute.com

Both Part 107-licensed and recreational drone pilots can now fly their drones at night without having to apply for a waiver.

pilotinstitute.com

"February 3, 2022"

Before CBOs got approved.

 

[Don Testme]

"February 3, 2022"

Before CBOs got approved.

In the words of George Bush

Goerarge bush quote "not gonna do it" - Search Videos

www.bing.com

 

[BroomRider]

Which CBO rules are you adhering to in terms of "Recreational Flights"? If you are not flying under Part 107 then I guess it's safe to assume you're flying under the Exemption for limited recreational operations of unmanned aircraft ( 49 U.S. Code § 44809 - Exception for limited recreational operations of unmanned aircraft ). This is clearly defined under the TRUST Training program which I'm sure you have taken and passed since it's a legal REQUIREMENT for Recreational UAS Operations.

Part of ~44809 states you must follow a CBO set of rules and since currently the AMA the only approved CBO (this could change any day now) and they clearly state:

"For night flying, AMA requires that aircraft be equipped with anti-collision lighting that can be seen from 3 statute miles away unless it poses a hazard or distraction to the operator. Other lighting must be used in such a way that allows you to determine attitude and direction of flight. Hand-held illumination systems by themselves are inadequate for night flying operations. Night flight presents visual perception challenges. Since your vision and depth perception can be altered in darkness, night flying requires training through AMA."
(page 10 0f the AMA's Handbook)

https://www.modelaircraft.org/sites/default/files/documents/100.pdf

So again please enlighten us how your "illegal statement" of: "THAT MEANS NO LIGHTS AT NIGHT" is anything but HORRIBLE advice?

Mere curiosity on my part, but do I understand that correctly to say, or imply, that the FAA requires a recreational pilot to join a CBO, or just to fly according to (at least) 1 of the CBO's rules?

 

[Firejay27]

Mere curiosity on my part, but do I understand that correctly to say, or imply, that the FAA requires a recreational pilot to join a CBO, or just to fly according to (at least) 1 of the CBO's rules?

Fly according to CBO guidelines if you don't have a CBO near you. No need to join unless you want a voice in the CBO. I don't have a CBO in my area so I printed out the ones from "Flight Test" and use those. Never been asked though.

 

[13_Dragons]

Please correct me if I am wrong here But just because you fly as recreational pilot does NOT exempt you from the Part 107 rules and regs. In other words you can fly without being part 107 certified. But you still must fly within the rules and regs of Part 107
"
(a)In General.—Except as provided in subsection (e), and notwithstanding chapter 447 of title 49, United States Code, a person may operate a small unmanned aircraft without specific certification or operating authority from the Federal Aviation Administration if the operation adheres to all of the following limitations:
(1)
The aircraft is flown strictly for recreational purposes.
(2)
The aircraft is operated in accordance with or within the programming of a community-based organization’s set of safety guidelines that are developed in coordination with the Federal Aviation Administration.
(3)
The aircraft is flown within the visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft or a visual observer co-located and in direct communication with the operator.
(4)
The aircraft is operated in a manner that does not interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft.
(5)
In Class B, Class C, or Class D airspace or within the lateral boundaries of the surface area of Class E airspace designated for an airport, the operator obtains prior authorization from the Administrator or designee before operating and complies with all airspace restrictions and prohibitions.
(6)
In Class G airspace, the aircraft is flown from the surface to not more than 400 feet above ground level and complies with all airspace restrictions and prohibitions.
(7)
The operator has passed an aeronautical knowledge and safety test described in subsection (g) and maintains proof of test passage to be made available to the Administrator or law enforcement upon request.
(8)
The aircraft is registered and marked in accordance with chapter 441 of this title and proof of registration is made available to the Administrator or a designee of the Administrator or law enforcement upon request."

To my understanding, and I am studying for my Part 107 currently, You may not have to be certified under Part 107, But must still fly Under the rules of Part 107.
Again please correct me if I am wrong here.

 

[Don Testme]

Please correct me if I am wrong here But just because you fly as recreational pilot does NOT exempt you from the Part 107 rules and regs. In other words you can fly without being part 107 certified. But you still must fly within the rules and regs of Part 107
"
(a)In General.—Except as provided in subsection (e), and notwithstanding chapter 447 of title 49, United States Code, a person may operate a small unmanned aircraft without specific certification or operating authority from the Federal Aviation Administration if the operation adheres to all of the following limitations:
(1)
The aircraft is flown strictly for recreational purposes.
(2)
The aircraft is operated in accordance with or within the programming of a community-based organization’s set of safety guidelines that are developed in coordination with the Federal Aviation Administration.
(3)
The aircraft is flown within the visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft or a visual observer co-located and in direct communication with the operator.
(4)
The aircraft is operated in a manner that does not interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft.
(5)
In Class B, Class C, or Class D airspace or within the lateral boundaries of the surface area of Class E airspace designated for an airport, the operator obtains prior authorization from the Administrator or designee before operating and complies with all airspace restrictions and prohibitions.
(6)
In Class G airspace, the aircraft is flown from the surface to not more than 400 feet above ground level and complies with all airspace restrictions and prohibitions.
(7)
The operator has passed an aeronautical knowledge and safety test described in subsection (g) and maintains proof of test passage to be made available to the Administrator or law enforcement upon request.
(8)
The aircraft is registered and marked in accordance with chapter 441 of this title and proof of registration is made available to the Administrator or a designee of the Administrator or law enforcement upon request."

To my understanding, and I am studying for my Part 107 currently, You may not have to be certified under Part 107, But must still fly Under the rules of Part 107.
Again please correct me if I am wrong here.

The points you made look correct for both 107 and recreational pilots. But if you think about it. If you are recreational and film strictly that way, you won't be held as responsible as a 107 pilot, who is supposed to know the rules more thoroughly than a recreational pilot. 107 pilots will be held at higher standards.

 

[karlblessing]

The points you made look correct for both 107 and recreational pilots. But if you think about it. If you are recreational and film strictly that way, you won't be held as responsible as a 107 pilot, who is supposed to know the rules more thoroughly than a recreational pilot. 107 pilots will be held at higher standards.

If you do anything that falls outside of the recreational exemption, they will start treating you as a 107 pilot,the first thing they'll hit you with is not having a 107 certificate

 

[BroomRider]

Please correct me if I am wrong here But just because you fly as recreational pilot does NOT exempt you from the Part 107 rules and regs. In other words you can fly without being part 107 certified. But you still must fly within the rules and regs of Part 107
"
(a)In General.—Except as provided in subsection (e), and notwithstanding chapter 447 of title 49, United States Code, a person may operate a small unmanned aircraft without specific certification or operating authority from the Federal Aviation Administration if the operation adheres to all of the following limitations:
(1)
The aircraft is flown strictly for recreational purposes.
(2)
The aircraft is operated in accordance with or within the programming of a community-based organization’s set of safety guidelines that are developed in coordination with the Federal Aviation Administration.
(3)
The aircraft is flown within the visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft or a visual observer co-located and in direct communication with the operator.
(4)
The aircraft is operated in a manner that does not interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft.
(5)
In Class B, Class C, or Class D airspace or within the lateral boundaries of the surface area of Class E airspace designated for an airport, the operator obtains prior authorization from the Administrator or designee before operating and complies with all airspace restrictions and prohibitions.
(6)
In Class G airspace, the aircraft is flown from the surface to not more than 400 feet above ground level and complies with all airspace restrictions and prohibitions.
(7)
The operator has passed an aeronautical knowledge and safety test described in subsection (g) and maintains proof of test passage to be made available to the Administrator or law enforcement upon request.
(8)
The aircraft is registered and marked in accordance with chapter 441 of this title and proof of registration is made available to the Administrator or a designee of the Administrator or law enforcement upon request."

To my understanding, and I am studying for my Part 107 currently, You may not have to be certified under Part 107, But must still fly Under the rules of Part 107.
Again please correct me if I am wrong here.

Strictly Recreational, <250gm, no requirement to register.

 

[Don Testme]

If you do anything that falls outside of the recreational exemption, they will start treating you as a 107 pilot,the first thing they'll hit you with is not having a 107 certificate

I know, but the recreational pilot won't be expected to know that because he didn't study 107 standards. Thus, the recreational pilot is held to a lower standard of resposibility. If it's the recreational pilot's first infraction and one that wasn't blatantly malicious with knowing intent to break a law he or she may just get a warning for the first time offense.

If you do such a thing KNOWING 107 rules, you are assumed to be "KNOWINGLY" committing an illegal act, and held to those higher standards and likely receive a more intense punishment than the "ignorant"/ "unknowing" recreational pilot.

 

[karlblessing]

...

If you do such a thing KNOWING 107 rules, you are assumed to be "KNOWINGLY" committing an illegal act, and held to those higher standards and likely receive a more intense punishment than the "ignorant"/ "unknowing" recreational pilot.

I get what you're saying, but in other areas of law, ignorance is very rarely ever an excusable defense, so not sure how would be different in this case. Plus before CBOs there was an easy 9 bullet list of what to follow, don't go outside of that, then don't have to worry.

Though the FAA unlike other branches historically has sought to educate and be more reactive (it was congress that pushed a lot of that 107 stuff). But they still will cite 107 regs violated, how they plan to address it seems to be case by case, like how many chances they gave that one Philadelphia pilot before finally fining him 180k.

 

[Dmcvey]

Be simpler if the FAA would just drop the Rec status and have one set of rules.

 

[MS Coast]

Be simpler if the FAA would just drop the Rec status and have one set of rules.

Be careful of what you wish for. It's difficult to imagine any set of rules and requirements for operating drones being any simpler that the current 44809.

The same set of rules can't be expected to address both simple drones and operations and far more complex and potentially hazardous commercial operations.

 

[Don Testme]

Be simpler if the FAA would just drop the Rec status and have one set of rules.

That would be the most destructive thing that could every happen to flying drones. IT WOULD NO LONGER BE CLASSIFIED AS A HOBBY. The hobbyists or those that just fly for fun and to film for their own pleasure would no longer buy them. "FAA requires you go to a testing center and study for a few days before you are allowed to fly a drone." Haahaa.

 

[Dmcvey]

That would be the most destructive thing that could every happen to flying drones. IT WOULD NO LONGER BE CLASSIFIED AS A HOBBY. The hobbyists or those that just fly for fun and to film for their own pleasure would no longer buy them. "FAA requires you go to a testing center and study for a few days before you are allowed to fly a drone." Haahaa.

So, two set of rules are better? If I video a sunset and sell it, I have a "higher" standard then the someone shooting the same sunset and hanging the picture on their wall. That is the dumbest part.

Works in EU.

I would bet that 90% of rec flyers are flying illegal anyway. Don't think so, just ask them which CBO they are using and provide proof.

 

[Don Testme]

So, two set of rules are better? If I video a sunset and sell it, I have a "higher" standard then the someone shooting the same sunset and hanging the picture on their wall. That is the dumbest part.

Works in EU.

I would bet that 90% of rec flyers are flying illegal anyway. Don't think so, just ask them which CBO they are using and provide proof.

Drones are not guns. Classic car enthusiasts are not held to the same standards as a daily commuter either. Tell your 8 year old kid to take part 107. That is laughable.

Also, their are airguns and firearms. Used for different things maybe, but not all the time. they also have two sets of rules.

 

[BroomRider]

So, two set of rules are better? If I video a sunset and sell it, I have a "higher" standard then the someone shooting the same sunset and hanging the picture on their wall. That is the dumbest part.

Works in EU.

I would bet that 90% of rec flyers are flying illegal anyway. Don't think so, just ask them which CBO they are using and provide proof.

It seems clearly evident that the FAA, etc, are merely wanting a piece of any tangible gain or benefit that defines the "commercial" classification.

At least, in that regard, they are no better than "The Mob", only with badges.

Anyone above the minimum age can fly a <250gm class UAV, strictly for recreational purposes.

Flying the same, or even lighter UAV with less potential for damage – the actual reason for that weight class division – but for anything other than recreational purposes, & you've got to go through the entire Pt.107 licensing process, renewals, registration, numbering, etc. etc. etc. & be treated the same as the pilot flying any heavier UAV weighing up to – what was it, 55lbs?

Not to mention, if I recall clearly – please correct me if I'm in error – a licensed Pt.107 pilot is considered to always be flying commercially, regardless of what weight class UAV they're flying, or whether for commercial or recreational purposes.

I'm not surprised that the FAA regs, particularly as they pertain to UAVs & their pilots, seem purposely a tangled, confusing & sometimes, contradictory mess – not so much because of the emerging UAV technology & increasing numbers – but being so difficult to get clear understandings & definitions.

The results give a wide latitude for, & inconsistency in, interpretation & application.

This also results in many UAV pilots being cowed by the deluge of walls of legalese, putting their UAVs on the shelf or up for sale, & deters potential newcomers getting involved in the 1st place; the same for other RC aircraft & (potential) pilots.

I get the distinct impression that the FAA is under pressure & influence – with the AMA being ultimately complicit – by the impending mass usage & deployment of such things as delivery drones, etc. owned & operated by the corporations like Amazon, etc.

Lobbyists aren't cheap & just 1 corporate pocket is far deeper than all the UAV pilots put together, even IF we could all get on the same page regarding the freedom to safely enjoy our UAVs without some sheeple trying to kiss the @$$e$ of those who are continuing to tighten the noose.

Somehow, I don't ever see that happening & I'm not holding my breath waiting.

“The beatings will continue until morale improves.”